This mixed method, in-depth case study in Colorado examines the degree to which key players in the child welfare, early intervention/preschool special education (EI/Preschool SPED) and early care and education (ECE) systems (e.g. Head Start, preschool, child care centers, family child care homes) collaborate to meet the developmental needs of children ages 0-5 who are involved in the child welfare system. An ecological perspective serves as the conceptual framework to support the goals of the project and to guide the development of this study (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).

This research includes a quantitative analysis of data from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Wellbeing (NSCAW, a nationally representative sample of children involved in the child welfare system). Additional quantitative research was conducted through two surveys (optional paper or on-line survey) in Colorado between 2005-2006: the Foster Parent Survey, a statewide survey of foster parents drawn from public and private agency lists of licensed families (n=266), and the Child Welfare Caseworker Survey, a statewide survey of child welfare caseworkers and caseworker supervisors drawn from public and private agency lists (n=339).

The qualitative component of this research was conducted through field study interviews, with professionals (Child Welfare, Early Intervention, and Early Care and Education) and foster and biological parents of children under 5 in the child welfare system. These interviews were conducted in Adams, Alamosa, Arapahoe, Conejos, and El Paso counties (n=134).

Cf: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR30821.v2

Contents

Foster Parent Survey Public Data

Child Welfare Caseworker Survey Public Data

Foster Parent Survey Restricted Data

Child Welfare Caseworker Survey Restricted Data

Description

Mode of access: Intranet.

Notes

Title from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2016-02-11.

Series Statement

ICPSR 30821

ICPSR (Series) 30821

Other Forms

Also available as downloadable files.

Copyright & Permissions

Rights statements and licenses provide information about copyright and reuse associated with individual items in the collection.

a|
<p>This mixed method, in-depth case study in Colorado examines the degree to which key players in the child welfare, early intervention/preschool special education (EI/Preschool SPED) and early care and education (ECE) systems (e.g. Head Start, preschool, child care centers, family child care homes) collaborate to meet the developmental needs of children ages 0-5 who are involved in the child welfare system. An ecological perspective serves as the conceptual framework to support the goals of the project and to guide the development of this study (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).</p> <p>This research includes a quantitative analysis of data from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Wellbeing (NSCAW, a nationally representative sample of children involved in the child welfare system). Additional quantitative research was conducted through two surveys (optional paper or on-line survey) in Colorado between 2005-2006: the Foster Parent Survey, a statewide survey of foster parents drawn from public and private agency lists of licensed families (n=266), and the Child Welfare Caseworker Survey, a statewide survey of child welfare caseworkers and caseworker supervisors drawn from public and private agency lists (n=339).</p> <p>The qualitative component of this research was conducted through field study interviews, with professionals (Child Welfare, Early Intervention, and Early Care and Education) and foster and biological parents of children under 5 in the child welfare system. These interviews were conducted in Adams, Alamosa, Arapahoe, Conejos, and El Paso counties (n=134).</p>Cf: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR30821.v2

a|
<p>All licensed foster parents in 31 of 64 Colorado counties that complied with our request for names on their public lists; 7 out of 25 private agencies also provided their agency lists.</p> <p>All child welfare caseworkers and supervisors in 54 of 64 Colorado counties that complied with our request for names on their public lists; 7 out of 25 private agencies also provided their lists. Agencies were asked to provide names of those serving children 0-5 in the previous 12 months.</p>